Slashdot Mirror


Churches Use Halo To Spread the Word, Raise Eyebrows

The New York Times has a lengthy look at an unorthodox way to spread the religious word: Halo 3 multiplayer matches. Churches across the country have adopted 'Halo Nights' as a way to get kids together in religious centers and church basements. "The alliance of popular culture and evangelism is challenging churches much as bingo games did in the 1960s. And the question fits into a rich debate about how far churches should go to reach young people. Far from being defensive, church leaders who support Halo -- despite its "thou shalt kill" credo -- celebrate it as a modern and sometimes singularly effective tool. It is crucial, they say, to reach the elusive audience of boys and young men." Just the same, the use of the game is raising concerns among some onlookers. GamePolitics reports that many faith communities are heavily debating the issue.

8 of 474 comments (clear)

  1. Thou shalt not kill? by Aladrin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't think 'thou shalt not kill' ever refered to anything except humans. Otherwise, all the Christians that are eating meat will have some serious explaining to do.

    I think this is a good idea for the church... Get the kids used to being at the church, and interacting with their friends there, possibly even friends that they never get to see otherwise. It establishes it as a friendly place that they want to be, the kids have some supervision while they play, and everyone involved is happy.

    --
    "If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
    1. Re:Thou shalt not kill? by DragonWriter · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Modern Christians say its actually thou shalt not murder with legally sanction killing being permissible.


      Actually, the idea that the proper understanding of the sense of the commandment is a prohibition on murder (which doesn't necessary give unlimited sanction to any killing a government sanctions, either) and not all killing isn't some innovation that "modern Christians" invented; it was the general interpretation before Christ (its hardly as if ancient Israel viewed either war or capital punishment as forbidden), and also the dominant interpretation from the earliest Christianity.

      If anything, the "innovation" throughout the history of Christianity has been finding progressively broader classes of acts of killing that are considered within the prohibition of the commandment.
  2. Well, we haven't do that exactly... by GweeDo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    At my church (church of about 100 in a town of 2000) we happily use video games and things like that to bring teens in. While we have never used M rated games, we do have Wii tournaments from time to time. It is a great way to give the kids something safe to do (in a town of 2000 there isn't much) and gets them comfortable with the Church and the Youth Leaders we have.

    In regards to Halo 3 though, I do know our Senior High Sunday School teacher used it as the basis for his lesson last week. He actually had me come up and give a brief overview of the story from Halo 1 and 2 to start things off ;)

    Churches do need to be careful to be "in the world, but not of it", but at the same time don't be afraid of using main stream culture and entertainment in new ways to both teach and to simply get people interested.

  3. Killing != Murder by tbcpp · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's actually a common misconception that the Bible condemns killing. The misquoted verse from the 10 commandments was mis-translated in the KJV as "thou shalt not kill". Instead it should have been translated as "thou shalt not murder". The Bible (and God it's author) does not condemn killing in defence, punishment for a crime, or in wartime. What it does condemn is murder. So with this in mind Halo doesn't violate the 10 commandments at all.

    Yes, I'm a Christian, and yes I love playing Halo.

    --
    Man is the lowest-cost, 150-pound, nonlinear, all-purpose computer system which can be mass-produced by unskilled labor.
    1. Re:Killing != Murder by Pojut · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The Bible (and God it's author)
      I was under the impression that god DIDN'T write the bible...I mean, after all, if god was the author, why do bible's have copyright dates? Is god afraid of someone spreading the word illegally?

      The bible was written by man...just like the torah, just like the que'ran, just like every religious book. Written by men who thought the world was flat.
  4. Spending priorities? by kjkeefe · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I've always wondered how churches like that can rationalize spending money on a 20 foot screen with a nice projector and 18" subwoofer when that money could be applied to more useful pursuits such as helping the poor. Every time I drive past a church that is building a new multi-million dollar extension with fine architecture on expensive land I wonder the same thing. Why not give that money to single mothers trying to keep their families above water or drug rehabilitation programs or education programs for ex-convicts?

    If you sit back and think of the dollars tied up in religious infrastructure, it is absolutely astounding. Ask yourself, if you combine the equity of all religious property within a 2 mile radius of your house, how much do you get? I know for me, I would estimate it at around 2 million...

    I guess my first mistake was wondering how churches can _rationalize_ anything...

    --
    1, 2, 3, 4, 5... That's the combination on my luggage!
  5. Re:Wrong translation by Lemming+Mark · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why would one assert that the NIV is a "superiour" translation? The King James Version was the dominant guide to Christian thought for English speaking people for more than 300 years. It would be curious to argue that the people who adhered to the guidance in the King James version were not (and are not) "inferiour" Christians to those who now use the New International Version which has only existed for (almost) the past 30 years. Given the short history of this new translation, its value, for better of for worse, is yet to be proven. I'd argue there's a case for judging whether something is a "superior" translation strictly on the basis of the quality of source materials available for the translator to work with (more direct translation vs a translation of a translation of a ...) and better understanding of the nuances of ancient language that are made possible by more recent academic research. I'd say this is fairly independent of how the book was received as a religious text. It doesn't necessarily mean that the people who used that translation were inferior Christians but it may mean the texts they were using corresponded less closely to the older versions in ancient languages.

    Whether the quality of the translation in terms of closeness to the original actually matters to the KJV as a holy book will doubtless be debated. I have friends who are convinced that the KJV is the one correct translation and I imagine they believe this on the basis of the content and on the basis of how they've been taught to interpret it - independently of what translators may describe as being technically the best. I'd say that it rather depends whether you believe you should follow the original texts as best understood academically, or whether you believe in a specific interpretation of the texts which you may feel to be superior spiritually somehow.

    Personally I think it's very important to realise that all translations are likely imperfect, but that alternative translations could offer valuable insights into the subject matter and the process of how modern versions were arrived at.
  6. Thou shalt not kill? except.... by gnuman99 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    And how about explaining the Crusades? Oh, I guess they were not humans at the time.

    The support for military? The support for the death penalty? The support for these two comes directly from the so called religious crowd. Oh, but as long as they protest the abortion thing, I guess that makes it all better. They are not much different from the jihadists or other religious fanatics.

    "Thou shalt not kill except for enemies of God and you can choose who is my enemy" - that seems to be how things are these days in both "devout christian" and "devout muslim" crowds while both proclaiming "peaceful religion". More people died in religious wars as percentage of population than any other wars in the history of this planet.

    I guess the mod points here will depend who gets to read the message. I hope they don't declare some holy war or send a sniper my way. Sorry about the rant, but churches and religions are as much about "Thou shalt not kill" as much as it suits their goals. If their goals have any conflict with it, they have a very easy way around the so called "god's rules".